|
Raxivace posted:INLAND EMPIRE. I usually like Lynch's weird surreal worlds but that film felt like a rather boring take on the same concept explored in Lost Highway and Mulholland Dr., and at 3 hours in length it just felt tedious to get through. Inland Empire is actually one of my favorites of his. It's definitely the same concept as Lost Highway and Mulholland Drive, but it goes further with it than those two ever did (and unlike those, I don't think Inland Empire's narrative is a simple puzzle that can be easily solved). I also think the length is a virtue, essentially pounding the viewer into submission. It's an ugly, mean, intense, unrelenting film, but I've seen very few things that have shaken me like it does. I totally get why the people who don't like it feel like they do, but I personally think it stands out from Lost Highway and Mulholland Drive enough to be its own thing, and in a lot of ways I think it's the ultimate expression of that point in his career.
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 08:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:17 |
|
|
Inland Empire is really good actually. Sure it shares a lot of the material with Lost HIghway and Mulholland Drive, but with an even more radical narrative structure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 08:21
|
|
|
There were some brilliant moments in "Inland Empire" but it felt like a movie where a director was given too much control over their project. Prior to that Lynch had always had strict contractual obligations over the running time of his films ("Blue Velvet" for instance absolutely had to run 2 hours or under, and the final cut is literally one second shy of 2 hours). After years of hearing that there were cuts of "Blue Velvet", "Fire Walk With Me", and "Lost Highway" that were a whopping 1 to 2 hours longer than the released version, it was interesting to see "Empire" and feel like I was watching a rough cut of something that needed to be shortened. I think another big part of this movie is I missed seeing it in theaters, where the hypnotically slow pace can actually work some extra magic on you (Tarkovsky's films really benefit from this IMO).
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 16:24
|
|
|
Robert Denby posted:I think another big part of this movie is I missed seeing it in theaters, where the hypnotically slow pace can actually work some extra magic on you (Tarkovsky's films really benefit from this IMO). Tarkovsky's a good reference point, yeah. Inland Empire is definitely a movie that benefits from being seen on a large screen with the volume cranked as loud as possible. I've got a projector, and the experience there is completely different from my TV or computer monitor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
Inland Empire rules. That's all I've really got to add to the conversation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
Inland Empire is really, really high up on my list of favorite films, which is probably saying a lot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
Robert Denby posted:There were some brilliant moments in "Inland Empire" but it felt like a movie where a director was given too much control over their project. Prior to that Lynch had always had strict contractual obligations over the running time of his films ("Blue Velvet" for instance absolutely had to run 2 hours or under, and the final cut is literally one second shy of 2 hours). After years of hearing that there were cuts of "Blue Velvet", "Fire Walk With Me", and "Lost Highway" that were a whopping 1 to 2 hours longer than the released version, it was interesting to see "Empire" and feel like I was watching a rough cut of something that needed to be shortened. I think another big part of this movie is I missed seeing it in theaters, where the hypnotically slow pace can actually work some extra magic on you (Tarkovsky's films really benefit from this IMO). It's a movie about a woman who becomes lost within shifting permutations of a labyrinthine story. I don't see how you could achieve that feeling without a long running time and disorienting, somewhat unfocused approach to the plot. On the other hand, I would say that Fire Walk With Me didn't need any additional scenes added in. Laura is the core of the film, and distracting from that with cameos and call-backs to the series wouldn't have strengthened the final product. Lord Krangdar fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Oct 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:It's a movie about a woman who becomes lost within shifting permutations of a labyrinthine story. I don't see how you could achieve that feeling without a long running time and disorienting, somewhat unfocused approach to the plot. Nailed it. If Lynch never makes another feature then Inland Empire will serve as his magnum opus, as it's everything he had been building to his entire career. He achieves perfect dream logic and structure. One scene often transitions into a completely different scenario without you even noticing until it's done. Perfect tonal shifts from funny to downright terrifying. Perfect camera work, and shooting digital gave it a hazier feeling than the grain of film would have. Dern gives the performance of her life and should have gotten a Best Actress nomination (even though it was never going to happen). It's a capstone. No wonder Lynch has been avoiding features for so long since, he probably needs to reassess where he can even go with the format after that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 07:29
|
|
|
Looks like Criterion has more titles from Warner Bros. coming up. The New World seems to be hinted (a Malick film is coming from them and that's the only one besides Badlands) and a pre-code film. And it's not just Criterion... they're also licensing to Shout! Factory and Twilight Time. This is a pretty big deal considering they were the only major studio that didn't license anything to Criterion in the laserdisc days.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:This is a pretty big deal considering they were the only major studio that didn't license anything to Criterion in the laserdisc days. Isn't Blade Runner Warner Bros?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:and a pre-code film. ... like what?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
Sheldrake posted:... like what? I hope its Scarface.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:I hope its Scarface. Scarface was released by UA and has nothing to do with Warners, unfortunately. But there a large number of Warner pre-Codes that could use a great blu-ray treatment, especially some of their Busby Berkeley musicals.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
I'd put my bets on it being the 1932 Jekyll & Hyde or Freaks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
One of the films I picked up during this last sale was Thief, and wooooow that was a good film. One of my favorite criterions in a long time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 14:07
|
|
|
 Yes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
November is usually the BN.com Criterion sale, yes?  I've only seen Playtime and uh, I guess The Illusionist if you count that, but I can't wait to sink my teeth into more Tati. Really loved both of those movies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:November is usually the BN.com Criterion sale, yes? Mon Oncle gonna knock your socks off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
zenintrude posted:Mon Oncle gonna knock your socks off. Saw it recently and I have to agree with this. Mon Oncle was great. I am looking forward to having Tati on my shelf.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 00:17
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:November is usually the BN.com Criterion sale, yes? Yeah, the sale starts 11/11 and runs through 12/2.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:Yeah, the sale starts 11/11 and runs through 12/2. And then I'm evicted from my apartment on 12/3.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
So in preparation for the sale, I've been looking at the releases since the last sale. Anyone have thoughts on My Darling Clementine, F for Fake and All That Jazz? Any other gems that I'm missing besides the Tati collection and Eraserhead?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 04:11
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:Anyone have thoughts on My Darling Clementine, F for Fake and All That Jazz? They're all great, but especially the last two.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 04:12
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:So in preparation for the sale, I've been looking at the releases since the last sale. Anyone have thoughts on My Darling Clementine, F for Fake and All That Jazz? Any other gems that I'm missing besides the Tati collection and Eraserhead? The Innnocents. The first time I watched it, I remember right away thinking "this girl is the creepiest loving kid I've ever seen," ...and then her brother arrives home and he's somehow far far creepier than his sister. The entire film is just wholly unsettling. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q33FVqRlWCo
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 04:34
|
|
|
morestuff posted:They're all great, but especially the last two. Seconding F for Fake. Welles was the greatest troll of them all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 08:13
|
|
|
Raxivace posted:Seconding F for Fake. Welles was the greatest troll of them all. "F for Fake" is one of my top 10 favorite films of all time. I can't really think of anything else that matches it in terms of its style and presentation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 14:21
|
|
|
Yeah F for Fake is incredible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
Rusty Staub posted:Yeah F for Fake is incredible. I'll also show some love here, as I don't see it get mentioned enough. Nice to see this blu-ray is putting some spotlight back onto the film. One of my all-time favourites as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
Your love of F for Fake will depend quite a bit on how much you like watching a fat man stroll around in a cape.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
zenintrude posted:Your love of F for Fake will depend quite a bit on how much you like watching a fat man stroll around in a cape. A fat man with a soothing, authoritative voice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
You fools best not be sellin' My Darling Clementine short. A goddamn masterpiece and one of the finest films John Ford ever made. Also in the Top 3 Henry Fonda films. Basically get My Darling Clementine or gtfo. Edit: I like F for Fake but it never wowed me. And I like Welles a lot. What should I keep in mind when I rewatch it someday down the line? TrixRabbi fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Oct 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Discount Viscount posted:A fat man with a soothing, authoritative voice. A fat man in a cape with a soothing,authoritative voice that also PERFORMS MAGIC!
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
F for Fake also has a great supplement– One Man Band– about Welles' abandoned projects with a bunch of footage I can't imagine you'll see elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
I really ought to give F for Fake another try. The first time I tried to watch it, I just completely checked out somewhere during the opening monologue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
Was Criterion's edition of The Killers ever out-of-print? I swear I tried buying it once and could only find it at astronomical prices. It's available now, anyway - definitely picking that up during the sale.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
Amazon has a Criterion Horror Sale going. Blus of stuff like Scanners and Godzilla for under $20.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
morestuff posted:Amazon has a Criterion Horror Sale going. Blus of stuff like Scanners and Godzilla for under $20. Man, I've been really wanting to get De Palma's Sisters for a long time now, but I always hold out hope that there will be an amazing Bluray update in the future.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
Has anyone seen any good deals on the Tati boxset? You know, assuming someone was hypothetically too impatient to wait for the B&N sale?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 14:54
|
|
|
How much hope should one hold out for eventual blu-ray rereleases of Eclipse sets (or at least HD upgrades on hulu+)? I wanna buy the Oshima set but I feel a little foolish investing much in DVDs in 2014.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:17 |
|
|
Head's up to anyone who sent in their Eraserheads in. I just got mine in the mail today. So they're on their way if you haven't got yours yet.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 05:00
|
|
